Wild justice latest attack on shooting.
- Thread starter martyn52
- Start date
StephenToast
Well-Known Member
It would have been illegal before the changes to do what WJ are alleging.
I. Farticus
Well-Known Member
Apologies, it was the merging of ST and Sporting Rifle I was thinking of
Could it be a case of baiting WT, sort of shove it in their faces to make them “put up or shut up”
WB
WB
Dunwaters
Well-Known Member
That’s the whole point, it may not be legal.
You can shoot birds under the GL only if they’re causing a problem or you are operating within a published open hunting season, you can’t go out and, say for example, stand on a flight line shooting pigeons unless you can show that the pigeons are flighting to or from a field that you‘re protecting or you are shooting within the defined season. So far you haven’t set a pigeon season, but you could and it might be part of the solution.
The use of the GL to raise the black flag over certain species ( anywhere,anyhow, anytime, no quarter given ) is precisely what WJ has challenged.....and with some success.
Last edited by a moderator:
Or the thousands and thousands of fish/mammals killed as bycatch
Rake Aboot
Well-Known Member
Amazed that anyone would be surprised by this and the ST should have known what was coming.
This lot will not stop until driven bird shooting is gone and will attack every legal channel re, general licensing at every opportunity.
There is no support for shooting from Govt and the general population either are against it, or are apathetic to the point they may as well be against it.
Days are numbered folks. Whether we like it or not.
Saying "****em" won't cut it I'm afraid. They are the ones using the correct legal channels and shooting organisations are way behind on this.
This lot will not stop until driven bird shooting is gone and will attack every legal channel re, general licensing at every opportunity.
There is no support for shooting from Govt and the general population either are against it, or are apathetic to the point they may as well be against it.
Days are numbered folks. Whether we like it or not.
Saying "****em" won't cut it I'm afraid. They are the ones using the correct legal channels and shooting organisations are way behind on this.
Rake Aboot
Well-Known Member
Whether you agree with this or not ( I do) that is simply perceived as bordering on racist. Shooting won't be saved by religious bigotry I'm afraid.
I'd ban all religions by the way but not on this thread.
Yet basc say shooting over stubble or roost shooting is legal, as you are protecting adjacent crop or next years crop.
Therefore causing actual damage is not necessary.
WJ possible will at this time gain little other than bringing it to the attention of the “general public” however come the reissuing of the GLs next year, they may use such incidents as justification for yet another Judicial review.
He left sporting rifle a while before the so called merger, which wasn't much of a merge
Norfolk Deer Search
Well-Known Member
That’s a really poorly thought comment as @Rake Aboot quite righty says bordering racist!
we’re on borrowed time, get used to the idea!
I’ve had a good 25 years, 20 as a deer stalker, I’ll wager recreational shooting of birds and animals has other 20 of were lucky.
And I can’t help but wonder if our love of social media has been a major contribution to its ongoing demise.
NoIDeer
Well-Known Member
Looks to me that the bloke has done nothing unlawful, it would be difficult to prove otherwise now.
Wild justice are nothing but a bunch of vexacious litigants and need calling out by one of the shooting organisations.
Time for a certain shooting organisation to fight back and use that fighting fund I say. I'm a member btw!
Wild justice are nothing but a bunch of vexacious litigants and need calling out by one of the shooting organisations.
Time for a certain shooting organisation to fight back and use that fighting fund I say. I'm a member btw!
Last edited:
Nothing racist about it at all - religions are not races, more than one religion carries out these barbaric practices and under no circumstances in the modern world should fairy stories take precedence over animal welfare. The British veterinarian association agrees with me (I should have been more specific, I was referring to non-stun slaughter).
Joint call to end non-stun slaughter
The RSPCA and BVA have joined forces to call on the UK Government to repeal a legal exemption that permits animals to be slaughtered without pre-stunning, causing unnecessary pain and suffering.
www.bva.co.uk
Last edited:
I might have got this wrong, but I think their focus is on the 'wild' side of creation, rather than domesticated animals?
There is a risk of the anti-religious sentiment coming through more strongly than the animal welfare one here, I think?
My view is in fact that there are morally-questionable practices underpinning industrial-scale slaughter which run much deeper and further than whether the animal is stunned or not. Additionally, I'm aware that every time I shoot a deer through the chest, it dies by bleeding out while as conscious as it can be.
Fursty Ferret
Well-Known Member
Yes, but Jall55 made a good point about by catch in fishing.....now that is criminal! Wonder if WJ eat fish!?
Similar threads
